Turkey’s Recent National Role Conceptions
and Shifts in its Foreign Policy
by Jakub Pilch
Submitted to
Central European University
Department of International Relations and European Studies
In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts
Supervisor: professor Emel Akcali
CEU eTD Collection
Word count: 15778
Budapest, Hungary
2012
Abstract
This thesis examines the shifts in Turkish foreign policy of the last decade and the
accompanying changes in national role conceptions as defined by K. J. Holsti. Using primary
resources it attempts to identify national role conceptions articulated by Turkish
policymakers, which demonstrate the increased scope and activity of Turkish foreign policy
under the AKP rule. The changes in Turkish national role conceptions are reflected
discursively in the foreign policy debate, particularly in the frequent usage of the term "NeoOttomanism", which is supposed to denote current Turkish foreign policy, despite
policymakers objections to use it. I inquire on origins of this term and its accompanying NeoOttomanist debate to see how the shifts in Turkish foreign policy and its role conceptions are
translated discursively. In doing so, I rely on both secondary as well as primary sources, the
latter including interviews, which I conducted in Turkey with Turkish scholars and analysts. I
demonstrate that there exists a discrepancy between the officially articulated visions of
national role conceptions of Turkish policymakers and the perceptions of various scholars,
analysts and journalists. Moreover, I illustrate what specifically these perceptions imply and
CEU eTD Collection
what visions of Turkey in the region and in the world they project and advocate.
ii
Acknowledgements
I would like to express my gratitude to my supervisor professor Emel Akcali for her
assistance and supervision. I would also like to express my gratitude to my interviewees: Ziya
Öniş from Koç University in Istanbul, Ioannis Grigoriadis from Bilkent University in Ankara,
Erdem Kaya from the BILGESAM think tank in Istanbul and Yusuf Çınar from the Strategic
CEU eTD Collection
Outlook think tank in Konya.
iii
Table of contents
1. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 1
2. Literature review ............................................................................................... 4
2.1. Methodology ................................................................................................ 16
3. National role conceptions in Turkish foreign policy ...................................... 19
4. Neo-Ottomanism: The discursive formulation of the recent Turkish foreign
policy conceptualizations. ................................................................................... 35
4.1. From Davutoglu’s Strategic Depth to Neo-Ottomanism ............................. 42
CEU eTD Collection
5. Conclusion ....................................................................................................... 44
iv
Lists of figures and tables
Role Theory and Sources of Human Behavior...................................................6
Table 1
National Role in International Relations Literature..........................................10
CEU eTD Collection
Figure 1
v
1. Introduction
Since the takeover of power by the Justice and Development Party (Adalet ve
Kalkınma Partisi - AKP) in 2002, Turkey has embarked not only on path of a very successful
economic development but has also become an increasingly important political player on the
international arena. Its importance has been demonstrated by the multitude of diplomatic
actions, the expansion of Turkish soft power and economic ties, in particular in reference to
countries located in the Turkish neighborhood, which comprises the Balkans, the Middle East
and the South Caucasus. One of the reasons for the development of a highly assertive and
self-confident foreign policy of consecutive AKP governments, all of them headed by Recep
Tayyip Erdoğan, has been the impressive performance of the Turkish economy, which grew
significantly over the past decade and is now the 17th largest economy in the world. However,
the changes in Turkish foreign policy originate primarily from the new paradigm, which was
brought to the discourse by the AKP government and which resulted in a gradual departure
from the Kemalist foreign policy1.
The theoretical framework for this new foreign policy paradigm was laid out by
foreign policy advisor to the Turkish prime minister professor Ahmet Davutoğlu, who became
Turkey's minister of foreign affairs in 2009. In his book "Strategic depth" he argued that
CEU eTD Collection
Turkish foreign policy was for many decades unnaturally unbalanced towards the West, it was
reactive instead of being proactive, crisis-oriented, lacking a strategic vision, and it
completely neglected Turkey's neighbors. Davutoğlu also suggested that the Cold War by and
large conditioned such a foreign policy but after the collapse of the bipolar world, Turkey
1
Kemalism as a foreign policy vision that favors cautiousness, limited cooperation with the neighbors and
international organizations. It frowns upon Islamic influence in politics and Ottoman past and stresses the
importance of the army as the guardian of the secular order established by the founder of modern Turkey;
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk.
1
needs to reposition itself on the "great chessboard" and rediscover its imperial past, which has
been neglected for many decades2.
Davutoğlu's foreign policy vision for Turkey has been labeled by many analysts and
scholars, both Turkish and international such as Ömer Taşpınar or Ariel Cohen as NeoOttomanist, because of its reach towards countries which once were part of the Ottoman
Empire, solidarity with Muslim countries on a number of issues and the behavior and
ambitions of a regional hegemon. This term, however, is refuted by Turkish officials because
of its implications of having imperial notions and not reflecting the "reality". The Turkish
policymakers argue instead that their "new vision" which is not to dominate but to develop
"zero problems with neighbors"3. These developments were accompanied by the cooling
down of relations with the United States, a slowed down process of European integration and
deteriorating relations with Israel. On the other hand, Turkey's relations with Russia have
been developing rapidly, ties with Iran have been strengthened, cooperation with Africa has
reached new levels, and Turkey has become one of the key advocates of the Palestinian cause
on the international arena.
In my thesis I am going to explore the emergence of this new Turkish foreign policy
vision which is frequently labeled as Neo-Ottomanist by scholars and analyst. I will argue that
CEU eTD Collection
since Neo-Ottomanism is not endorsed as an official policy by the Turkish government, one
cannot speak of it as a foreign policy conceptualization but rather as a foreign policy
discourse articulated by certain scholars, analysts and politicians, both Turkish and foreign,
for reasons which I will outline in the main body of my thesis. However, prior to that I am
going to analyze what kinds of national role conceptions are implied (explicitly and
implicitly) by this policy, which is commonly referred to as Neo-Ottomanist. I believe that the
2
Ömer Taşpınar, Neo-Ottomanism and Kemalist foreign policy, [in] Today's Zaman, 22 September 2008
http://www.todayszaman.com/columnists-153882-neo-ottomanism-and-kemalist-foreign-policy.html.
3
Policy of Zero Problems with our Neighbors, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/sub.en.mfa?45b45ccf-8814-4029-92245685e8ca3542, last accessed at 14:49, on the 18th of May 2012.
2
national role conceptions theory developed by Kalevi Jaakko Holsti possesses the necessary
explanatory power to throw light upon how this new foreign policy has emerged within the
Turkish foreign policy-making arena and to illustrate how it reflects changing perceptions of
Turkey's roles which are projected by its ruling elites, particularly by foreign minister
Davutoğlu and prime minister Erdoğan since this theory can account for cognitive maps
developed by policymakers. I will argue that this new policy is an attempt at redefining
national role conceptions and foreign policy orientations of Turkey and it projects new roles
due to the fact that the old roles are mostly incompatible with contemporary order, which is
neither bipolar nor caught in the dynamics of the Cold War, hence new roles need to be
assigned for a state to pursue its interests on the international arena. I will then display the
ways in which this new policy as cognitively imagined by Turkish policy-makers has started
to be articulated Neo-Ottomanism by scholars and analysts. In doing so, I hope to bring a
theoretical contribution to foreign policy conceptualizations and shifts as defined by Holsti,
since my empirical study suggests that Holsti’s theory falls short of explaining the different
CEU eTD Collection
discursive forms that foreign policy conceptualizations may take at the end.
3
2. Literature review
I believe that by using national role conceptions one can explain better the shifts in
Turkish foreign policy in the past decade, then by using other approaches, which are common
in the literature, such as the identity-based approach. I am going to explain below why I find
national role conceptions theory to be the most suitable one for my research. However, I am
going to introduce first the theory of national role conceptions of Holsti, which forms the
theoretical framework for my analysis of shifts in Turkish foreign policy under the AKP
government.
The theory of national role conceptions was developed by K. J. Holsti, who explains it
in depth in his study "National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy" which was
published in 1970. What prompted Holsti to formulate the theory, was the omnipresence in
academic literature of a limited number of state role conceptions performed by states in the
bipolar world system during the Cold War period. Holsti found that the terms bloc leader,
satellite, ally, and non-aligned did not exhaust the number of roles states play and those roles
did not "reveal all the behavioral variations observable in the different sets of relationships
states enter"4. Moreover, Holsti discovered that states usually do not project and play a single
role but rather a number of various roles, depending on their interests and foreign policy
CEU eTD Collection
outlook.
National role conceptions have been analyzed by also by other authors, according to
Naomi Bailin Wish role conceptions act as "foreign policy makers' perceptions of their
nations' positions in the international system"5. The beliefs and perceptions, policymakers
hold of their nations are significant explanans of shifts in foreign policy, which is a view
supported by Holsti in his other work, where he demonstrates that among various causes of
4
K. J. Holsti, National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy, [in] International Studies Quarterly,
Volume 14, Number 3, September 1970, p. 235.
5
Naomi Bailin Wish, Foreign Policy Makers and Their National Role Conceptions, [in] International Studies
Quarterly, Vol. 24 No 4, December 1980, p. 532.
4
realignments in foreign policy, shifts in perceptions and leadership qualities were the most
significant elements6. Charles Kupchan contributes to Holsti's claim by stating that elites'
belief system is the predominant factor shaping realignments of foreign policy in a new
international context, Kupchan adds that his study "demonstrates the critical importance of
taking beliefs seriously, of treating beliefs as variables that shape how elites interpret events
and formulate policy"7.
A more in-depth explanation of roles is given by Holsti in his study of national role
conceptions, where he compares various authors' understandings of roles and concludes that
roles refer to behaviors (decisions and actions) and "can be kept analytically distinct from role
prescriptions, which are the norms and expectations cultures, societies, institutions, or groups
attach to particular positions"8. He continues by saying that "role theory emphasizes the
interaction between the role prescription of the alter and the role performance of the occupant
of a position (ego)"9. This interplay is demonstrated by the graph Figure 1. Finally Holsti
concludes that there are arguments for believing that "the role performances (decision and
action) of governments may be explained primarily by reference to the policy-makers' own
conceptions of their nation's role in a region or in the international system as a whole"10. He
agrees with S.G. Walker that national role conceptions are significantly correlated with states'
CEU eTD Collection
general foreign policy behavior, which is conceived of as a role performance11.
6
K. J. Holsti, Why Nations Realign, Allen and Unwin, London, 1982.
Charles Kupchan, The Vulnerability of Empire, Cornelll University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1994, p. 490.
8
K. J. Holsti, 1970, op. cit., p. 239.
9
K. J. Holsti, Ibid., p. 239.
10
K. J. Holsti, Ibid., p. 240.
11
S. G. Walker, (1978) "National role conceptions and systematic outcomes." Prepared for the annual meeting of
the International Studies Association, Washington, D. C. February 22-25.
7
5
Source: K. J. Holsti, National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy, [in] International Studies
Quarterly, Volume 14, Number 3, September 1970, p. 240.
Another view is represented by Jacques E. C. Haymans, who states that national role
conceptions are cognitive constructions of decision-makers of "what the nation naturally
stands for and how high it naturally stands, in comparison to others in the international
arena"12. Richard Adigbuo adds to this definition that role conceptions and identities are
social phenomena, which can be shared even across majority of individuals in a particular
state, but even when those role conceptions are not shared, policy-makers' actions are based
CEU eTD Collection
on their ideas about their states' roles in the world and on which roles would be acceptable to
their constituencies13. Those role conceptions help politicians and policy-makers to orientate
their actions and are a "core of a grand causal map through which statesman make sense of
the world and their personal existence therein"14. Moreover, "roles provide individuals with a
12
Jacques E. C. Hymans, The Psychology of Nuclear Proliferation, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
2006, p. 18.
13
Richard Adigbuo, Beyond IR Theories: The case for National Role Conceptions, [in] Politikon, (April 2007),
34 (1), p. 89.
14
Chih-yu Shih, National Role Conception as Foreign Policy Motivation: The Psychocultural Bases of Chinese
Diplomacy, [in] Political Psychology , Vol. 9, No. 4 (Dec., 1988), p. 599.
6
stable sense of identity"15. However, roles, be they performed by individuals or by states, are
neither deterministic nor indefinitely elastic, they are behavioral categories, states and
individuals rely on to simplify and to guide them through a highly complex world16. They also
rely on a set of norms associated with interstate relations, and according to Chih-yu Shih
"diplomacy can be interpreted as a drama that embodies those norms, moreover playing that
drama gives statesmen a sense of self-worth"17. Those norms and role concepts can both serve
to help understand some of nations' puzzling foreign policy decisions or anomalies in the
conduct of it and also offer an explanation of continuities in foreign policy execution, thus
they confirm that "a state's foreign policy conforms to the policy-makers' national role
conceptions"18. In the case of Turkey they can help an analyst to find the underlying reasons
for changes in Turkish foreign policy of the past decade.
There are various national role conceptions, some of the most conventional of which
are superpower, middle power, regional power, etc.. However, those terms fail to indentify
how much diplomatic influence state exercise in various sets of relationships, they merely
suggest distinctions in terms of status on the international arena. Status is defined by Sarbin
and Allen as "a location in a the social structure defined by expectations for performance by
an incumbent.... The status dimension is correlated with legitimate power and social
CEU eTD Collection
esteem"19. Status perception in international relations, although more vague than in a social
context, is according to Wish, an important aspect of a national role conception, yet Holsti
points out that "status is not necessarily linked to functions and its consequences on foreign
policy behavior are largely unknown and unexplored"20. It is for this reason that I will not
15
Richard Adigbuo, op. cit., p. 89.
Richard Adigbuo, Ibid., p. 89.
17
Chih-yu Shih, op. cit., p. 599.
18
Richard Adigbuo, op. cit., p. 95.
19
T. R. Sarbin and V. L. Allen (1968) "Role theory" in G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.) The Handbook of
Social Psychology, Vol. 1. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, p. 551-552.
20
K. J. Holsti, op. cit., p. 242.
16
7
focus on status in my analysis but rather on national role performance, self-image and role
prescriptions.
According to Holsti, national role performance is "the general foreign policy behavior
of governments. It includes patterns of attitudes, decisions, responses, functions and
commitments toward other states, he calls these patterns national roles."21 A national role
conception is the image of state projected by its elites, an image of how the state should act on
the international arena, what functions it should perform on a continuing basis. As Chih-yu
Shih notes, "an essential part of our knowledge of the world is the role we believe we are
playing in that world. Our behavior confirms that our roles can be enacted. Behavior
dramatizes the world view by assuming that it is correct and it is shared by other people."22
This image is produced both for domestic as well as for an international audience, though for
different purposes; domestically it may serve as a legitimizing tool, whereas in the
international environment it may aim to demonstrate an attempt to either assume or reinforce
states' claim to position their views as desirable. Alexander and Willey go as far as saying
that self-image is the ultimate source of motivation"23, meaning it is the main driving force
behind foreign policy making. The projection of various images is clearly visible in Turkey,
especially in the domain of its foreign affairs, where Turkey is playing multiple roles
CEU eTD Collection
according to multiple visions of itself.
There is a large variety of reasons states assume certain national role conceptions,
which may include: their location, their geography, abundance or not of natural, economic,
technical and cultural resources, traditions, history, religion, ideology and even personality of
their rulers. Most of those causes are internal, however, external factors can also play a role in
the formation of national role conceptions, but there is no deterministic guarantee that a
21
K. J. Holsti, Ibid., p. 245.
Chih-yu Shih, op. cit., p. 601.
23
N. C. Alexander, and M. G. Willey, Situated activity and identity formation, [in] Rosenberg, M., and Turner,
R. (eds.), Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives, Basic Books, New York, 1981., p. 274.
22
8
certain neighborhood a state is located in will produce a particular role conception of that
state. Moreover, when it comes to domestic factors, "there is no logical or empirical reason to
believe that any particular type of state, must, or probably would, undertake specific policies
or orient itself to the system in a particular way because it is either strong or weak or satisfied
or dissatisfied."24
National role conceptions can be categorized based on various criteria and according
to Wish they can have one of the following four motivational orientations: individualistic,
cooperative, competitive or mixed25. Morgenthau approaches national role conceptions from a
different angle, stating that states' policies seek "either to keep power, to increase power, or to
demonstrate power"26. From such assumption Morgenthau derives three kinds of policies on
the international arena: policy of status quo, of imperialism and of prestige, and he suggests
that these policies can envisage national roles27. Other possible categorization of national
roles is the one, which suggests their distribution along the active-passive axis, rather than on
power differentials and this categorization is predominant in traditional literature. Holsti
identifies nine national roles types according to this stratification, and which are presented in
Table 1 starting from the top, they imply the highest degree of international activity, whereas
the ones on the bottom indicate passivity in foreign policy behavior28.
CEU eTD Collection
In Holsti's view, such typology is not exhaustive and neglects to address various
aspects of state roles, for example, it does not differentiate between states' power capabilities,
ideological outlooks or international status. That is why he undertook an extensive study of
state roles by analyzing material from seventy one different countries and created a typology
of 17 national role conceptions, which he explains in detail using specific examples. Similarly
to the previous typology present in traditional literature, he arranged his list according to the
24
K. J. Holsti, op. cit., p. 250.
Naomi Bailin Wish, op. cit., p. 538.
26
Hans J. Morgenthau, Politics Among Nations, (4th edition), Alfred A. Knopf, New York 1967, p. 36.
27
Hans J. Morgenthau, Ibid., p. 37.
28
K. J. Holsti, op. cit., p. 255.
25
9
degree of activity or passivity implied by the role conception. The 17 roles conceptualized by
Holsti are the following: bastion of revolution-liberator, regional leader, regional protector,
active independent, liberation supporter, anti-imperialist agent, defender of faith, mediatornegotiator, regional-subsystem collaborator, developer, bridge, faithful ally, independent,
CEU eTD Collection
example, internal development, isolate and protectee29.
Source: K. J. Holsti, op. cit., p. 255.
29
K. J. Holsti, Ibid., p. 260-271.
10
Because of or despite the 17 various roles identified by Holsti, "policymakers of most
states conceive of their state in terms of multiple sets of relationships and multiple roles
and/or functions."30 Holsti addresses the perception that the more national roles a state may
possess, the more active it will be on the international arena. He finds that, although there may
not necessarily exist a direct causal relationship between state's involvement on the
international arena and number of national roles, it is indeed usually the case among the states
he researched31. Wish complements his argument by stating that states "whose leaders
perceived dominant roles and/or role affecting large domains were more likely to participate
in the international arena."32 Holsti concludes with the remark that "governments which
perceive many and active role types will tend to be much more highly involved in the affairs
of the system or in subordinate systems than those states which have few and passive type
role conceptions."33 He also adds that most governments project a number of national roles
their states should play simultaneously, and he also states that governments may pursue
various policies on various levels, such as being expansionist economically but rather
reserved politically. Finally, he acknowledges that role conceptions are not the ultimate
perfect tool for analyzing foreign policy, yet they are a useful tool and can be regarded as an
independent variable in the research of foreign policy34.
CEU eTD Collection
Although Holsti's theory was developed during the Cold War and applied in the
international affairs of that time, it still has a significant explanatory power and can serve as a
useful tool for analyzing variations in foreign policy behavior. In my research I am going to
apply Holsti's role conceptions, since they seem more applicable to my study than the more
recent study on role conceptions by Glenn Chafetz, Hillel Abramson and Suzette Grillot,
which view them through the prism of their effect on compliance or non-compliance with
30
K. J. Holsti, Ibid., p. 277.
K. J. Holsti, Ibid., p. 283.
32
Naomi Bailin Wish, op. cit., p. 549.
33
K. J. Holsti, op. cit., p. 288.
34
K. J. Holsti, Ibid., p. 298.
31
11
nuclear weapons non-proliferation regime. Moreover, their typology of role conceptions
includes fewer role conceptions than Holsti's typology which is still not exhaustive enough to
describe the variety of role conceptions. However, the three authors make an important
addition to Holsti's work by highlighting the significance of social, nonsocial and contextual
elements in the formation of national role conceptions35. These three elements are important
for the analysis of Turkish foreign policy since the national role conceptions, responsible by
and large for its shifts, have been formed by social, nonsocial and contextual elements.
There are scholars who hold views that the conceptions in Turkish foreign policy are
by and large a product of shifts in Turkish identity, however, ideational factors fall short of
explaining all intricacies of Turkish foreign policy during the AKP government. Ariel Cohen
views the shift of axis in Turkey as a result of the AKP elite's attempts to dismantle the
Kemalist state order and build on its ruins a new one, more Islamic, populist and authoritarian
regime reflecting the political prominence of the new religiously observant political,
economic and social elite of Anatolia and Black Sea region, which distances itself from
Ankara-based Kemalists36. However, the alleged hidden Islamist agenda of the current
government, which is steering the country closer to the Middle East, does not explain why an
openly Islamic government of Necmettin Erbakan in the middle of the 1990's did not embark
CEU eTD Collection
on a serious revision of Turkish foreign policy.
According to Оğuzlu, the rise of Islam in Turkey can be seen through a closer
engagement with Hamas, a political party considered as a terrorist organization by Israel37;
however, this explanation is a convenient simplification used to undermine Turkey's emerging
regional role, part of which is composed of Turkey's involvement in the solution of the
35
Glenn Chafetz, Hillel Abramson and Suzette Grillot, Role Theory and Foreign Policy: Belarussian and
Ukrainian Compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime, [in] Political Psychology , Vol. 17, No. 4
(Dec., 1996), p.735.
36
Ariel Cohen, Washington concerned as Turkey leaving the West, [in] Turkish Policy Quarterly, Volume 9,
Number 3, p. 26.
37
Tarik Оğuzlu, Middle Easternization of Turkey's Foreign Policy: Does Turkey Dissociate from the West?, [in]
Turkish Studies, Vol. 9, No.1, 3-20, March 2008, p. 14.
12
Palestinian conflict. This involvement cannot be attributed solely to religious motives of
Sunni solidarity, which are also used by Оğuzlu to explain Turkey's attempts to forge closer
ties with Sunni groups in Iraq. Turkey is simply trying to gain a foothold in the region by
reaching out to the actors, which due to their similar religious backgrounds can be more
receptive and willing to cooperate with Turkey. Actually, despite frequent portrayals in the
media, the role of Islam as one of the main motivators of the recent changes in Turkish
foreign policy, is exaggerated. Instead, it is much more likely to be used as a convenient
cover, rather than a real moving force behind foreign policy choices38. Especially in the
security field Turkey's commitment to transatlantic ties is firm and not undermined by its
"flirting" with Iran and other countries in the region perceived in the West as hostile or rogue.
After all, at the end of the day Turkey decided to host NATO's early warning radar for the
anti-missile shield, which clearly demonstrates that Islam and solidarity with Muslims are not
the main driving forces of Turkish foreign policy, which is particularly in its security
dimension deeply committed to transatlantic obligations39.
Despite Turkish diplomatic and economic (over)activism in the region, Turkey
remains still firmly committed to European integration, and membership in the European
Union is the ultimate goal and the main axis along which Turkish policymakers orientate
CEU eTD Collection
Turkish foreign policy40. The emergence and influence of a Muslim identity is undeniable but
it does not completely overshadow other identities, which also play a role in the formation of
foreign policy, which is a matter of fact in the country as sizeable and as diverse as Turkey.
Summing up; states in general have multiple identities which may or may not be compatible
with each other to a certain degree, but what is more important is the fact that it is not them
exercising the greatest influence on policy-makers, it is the national role conceptions, their
38
Mustafa Aydın, Twenty Years Before, Twenty Years After: Turkish Foreign Policy at the Threshold of the 21st
Century, [in] Turkey's Foreign Policy in the 21st Century: A Changing Role in World Politics, ed. Tareq Ismael
and Mustafa Aydın, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003.
39
Barçın Yinanç, Re-allying with old allies, [in] Hürriyet Daily News, May 5th, 2012.
40
Turkey committed to EU membership, says top negotiator, [in] Hürriyet Daily News, 8/8/2010.
13
perceptions and imagination, hence I dismiss the ideational and identity factors as insufficient
explanans of the phenomenon of the emergence of new conceptions in Turkish foreign policymaking.
An alternative explanation of the transformation of Turkish foreign policy from,
commonly labeled by Davutoğlu as passive and reactive Kemalism41 to expansionist and
active foreign policy is offered by Kemal Kirişci and his application of the concept of the
trading state. According to him the shifts observed in Turkish foreign policy have their roots
in the liberalization of the Turkish economy in the early 1990's, which resulted in the
exponential growth of foreign trade and its crucial role in the national economy. He argues
that a trading state is an arena where a wider range of actors participate in the foreign policymaking, and actors have interests which often differ from the ones pursued by the traditional
actors, which are primarily concerned about security42. In contrast to them, the new actors are
primarily concerned about access to the export market, international trade and foreign direct
investments, they are advocates of a more open foreign policy, especially in Turkey's most
immediate neighborhood, where an increased economic interdependence will be beneficial
and strengthen the country both economically and politically. They advocate development of
closer economic ties with other nations, assuming that the improved economic relations will
CEU eTD Collection
be followed by stronger political cooperation, which would be a natural outgrowth of bilateral
trade and investments. Those ideas resonate in statements made by minister Davutoğlu, yet
although the recent shifts in Turkish foreign policy have a very firm economic background
and a new Turkish foreign policy conceptualization would not emerge without Turkey
emerging as a regional economic power, the idea of the trading state advocated by Kirişci
cannot explain certain foreign policy choices made by Turkey during the tenure of the AKP
41
Özden Zeynep Oktav (ed.), Turkey in the 21st Century: Quest for a New Foreign Policy, Asghate, Surrey
2011, p. 21.
42
Kemal Kirişci, The transformation of Turkish foreign policy: The rise of the trading state, [in] New
Perspectives on Turkey, no. 40 (2009), p. 33.
14
governments. If Kirişci's argument were the most essential factor underpinning Turkish
foreign policy, why would Turkey side with impoverished Palestinians, risking cooling down
the relations with an important economic partner such as Israel? Why would Turkish Airlines,
which are still 49,12% owned by the Turkish government43, launch direct flights from
Istanbul to war-torn Mogadishu, a route which is unlikely to become profitable? There is a
need to find a theory which could find an answer to this puzzle and the most suitable one
which I am going to apply is the theory of national role conceptions.
However, every theory has its limits and cannot explain all phenomena in depth and
the theory national role conceptions is no exception of it, because on the one hand it accounts
well for the shifts in foreign policy, yet on the other hand it cannot explain the discrepancy
between what policymakers say and what they actually do and how all these processes are
interpreted and articulated by others. In the case of Turkey policymakers there is a high
likelihood that policymakers have in mind a slightly different vision than they articulate,
because they may fear negative connotations, which could be evoked by a more direct
expression of their desires. The reasons behind it lie in history and in the legacy of the
Ottoman state, which may be perceived negatively by people in Turkey's neighborhood. But
such indirect or implicit Neo-Ottomanism as it is commonly labeled, mostly by its critics is
CEU eTD Collection
the result of a different discursive formulation of Turkey's increased engagement in the
region, "zero problems with neighbors" policy and other actions. In the following sections, I
am going to elaborate on this phenomena by displaying how these new conceptions have
emerged using Holsti’s theory, but by also demonstrating how it has been discursively
formulated by others In so doing I hope to bring some theoretical contributions by filling a
gap Holsti’s theory on national role conceptions .
43
http://www.turkishairlines.com/en-int/corporate/investor-relation/organization, last accessed at 15:44, on the
11th of May 2012.
15
2.1. Methodology
My research is based on a qualitative analysis of Turkish foreign policy, mostly by
having critically reviewed secondary sources such as academic publications on Turkish
foreign policy by both Turkish and foreign scholars. Moreover I have also analyzed
statements and speeches made by Turkish policy-makers, mainly Turkish president, prime
minister and foreign minister. Unfortunately, I had to rely on secondary sources when it came
to the analysis of the book "Strategic Depth" by Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu,
which as of now still has not been translated from Turkish into English. I was confined to a
lesser degree to secondary sources, which translated speeches of Turkish parliamentarians and
policymakers into English, because the website of Turkish Foreign Ministry contains a rich
collection of speeches and articles of foreign minister Davutoğlu, which I reviewed in the
search of national role conceptions articulated by him for Turkey.
Additionally, I have conducted interviews with four scholars and think tank analysts in
Turkey where I was inquiring on the sources and origins of the recent foreign policy
conceptualizations in Turkey. I have contacted various academic centers and think tanks in
Turkey but due to a low number of replies to my interview requests, I was confined to
interview a limited number of scholars and analysts who were willing to be interviewed. Two
CEU eTD Collection
of them were working in the academia at universities in Istanbul and Ankara and two other
were researchers working for Turkish think tanks, the first two are Ziya Öniş from Koç
University in Istanbul and Ioannis Grigoriadis from Bilkent University in Ankara. The other
two researchers are Erdem Kaya from the BILGESAM think tank in Istanbul and Yusuf Çınar
from the Strategic Outlook think tank in Konya. Their views expressed during the interviews
have helped me to identify the underpinnings of new foreign policy conceptualizations in
Turkey and the ways in which it has been started to be articulated as Neo-Ottomanism by
scholars and analysts and they supplement my qualitative research of secondary sources.
16
In order to analyze Turkish foreign policy, I have applied the national role conceptions
theory of Holsti and I am using his 17 national role types for my analysis. In order to
determine which national roles are advocated for Turkey by its politicians, I have analyzed
statements by both Turkish prime minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, president Abdullah Gül
and Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu. These statements can be considered to be part of the
Neo-Ottomanist discourse, although this label is refuted by Turkish policymakers but is
frequently used by analysts, hence it is an implicit and not explicit Neo-Ottomanist discourse
on behalf of Turkish authorities. Though they rather make indirect references to the Ottoman
Empire, still they indicate what national roles Turkish leaders project for their country on the
international arena. However, these roles have not been formulate discursively by Turkish
statesmen, who make references to the Ottoman Empire, hence many analysts and scholars
have labeled such a formulation of national roles and of foreign policy in general as NeoOttomanist because of the intensiveness of references to the Ottoman past and legacy both on
the discursive as well as on the practical level. Many of those roles are new and were brought
by the Neo-Ottomanist discourse, which stands in a contrast to the Kemalist foreign policy
articulations and practices which perceive a rather limited international role for Turkey than
the one envisaged by Neo-Ottomanist.
CEU eTD Collection
First I analyze in the second chapter the national roles implied by the new foreign
policy conceptualizations, commonly referred to as Neo-Ottomanist and then I am going to
highlight in my third chapter what Neo-Ottomanism is and where it originates from. I will do
so because despite frequent refutations of Turkish officials of the term "Neo-Ottomanist", it is
this term that is commonly employed to both label and to describe Turkish foreign policy.
Although the national roles implied by Turkish policymakers are not intended to have any
Neo-Ottomanist notions, they are commonly interpreted as such by many scholars and
analysts, that is why I find it necessary to highlight the development of the Neo-Ottomanist
17
discourse in Turkey, to understand better what it implies and what perceptions of Turkey it
projects.
I first focus both on the academic literature of the subject, reviewing major
perspectives on the new foreign policy conceptualizations in Turkey, as well as on the
findings of the interviews I conducted in Turkey with scholars of Turkish foreign policy. Then
in the second chapter I apply Holsti's theory of national role conceptions to Turkey, relying
heavily on the work of Bülent Aras and Aylin Görener "National role conceptions and foreign
policy orientation; the ideational bases of the Justice and Development Party's foreign policy
activism in the Middle East". However, unlike Aras and Görener I am combining the national
role conceptions typology developed by Holsti with the more recent study of Glenn Chafetz,
Hillel Abramson and Suzette Grillot, which defines a more limited number of roles. I find
both models to be complementary and I believe that applying roles from both models will
provide the researcher with a more accurate tool to portray national role conceptions
envisaged by the Turkish foreign policy elites. Moreover, I do not confine my research of new
foreign policy conceptualizations in Turkey in reference to the Middle East only, but expand
it to other areas where Turkish foreign policy has been particularly active during the tenure of
AKP governments. Using statements made by the Turkish leadership, I identify the national
CEU eTD Collection
roles projected by them and describe them in reference to Turkey. Finally I conclude my
thesis by reinforcing my claim to national role conceptions theory as a strong explanatory tool
for studying Turkish foreign policy.
18
3. National role conceptions in Turkish foreign policy
States' foreign policy preferences usually differ from one another, which is something
often taken for granted by journalists without employing a thorough thought-process to
analyze how states acquire these various preferences. These preferences are the product of
foreign policy elites of a given nation and they often have their origins in the nascent stage of
state's history, when the state was either established or experienced fundamental changes both
inside and outside of its frontiers. In the case of Turkey this period of history would clearly be
the years following the demise of the Ottoman Empire, end of World War I and the victorious
Turkish Independence War, which paved the way for Mustafa Kemal Atatürk to establish the
Turkish Republic in 1923 and implement his radical reforms, such as the abolition of the
caliphate, universal suffrage for women, secular character of the state and the introduction of
the Latin alphabet among many others. It was in that time when Turkish foreign policy role
conceptions were formed and became the official guiding principles in country's interaction
with other nations.
In terms of international affairs, Atatürk pursued a careful and restrained foreign
policy, which allowed him an uninterrupted consolidation of his power at home and a very
much needed stability for the formative period of the Republic, after a tumultuous decade
CEU eTD Collection
prior to its establishment. The official motto of the Kemalist foreign policy was the famous
quote of Atatürk "peace at home, peace in the world", which expressed his desire to prioritize
peace and stability in Turkey and in its neighborhood, even when it came at the price of
limited involvement in regional affairs. However, it would be an overstatement to describe
Atatürk as an isolationist, he was risk-averse but willing to cooperate when the cooperation
would not jeopardize the internal development of Turkey and its territorial integrity, what he
and his people passionately fought and made great sacrifices for. He recognized the
importance of international relations by saying:
19
“We cannot think of ourselves living alone by closed eyes. We cannot also live by taking our country
in a circle and keeping away from the global relations ourselves. Any country or nation who gets,
involved in such a manner will be condemned to be put under the dominance and yoke of other nations
44
who are able to embrace the philosophy of life in a larger angle”
Drawing from the early history of republic foreign policy I am inclined to state that the
most accurate national role conceptions of that period, from the ones suggested by Holsti,
were the ones of an internal developer and independent. A state with such role conceptions
usually focuses most of its efforts on domestic affairs, development of its economy and
pursues a rather cautious foreign policy. The foundations for such a foreign policy were laid
by Atatürk in order to strengthen Turkey domestically so that it could develop and catch up
with the developed Western world. According to Atatürk, Turkey had suffered from the
backwardness of the Ottomans, who prevented it from exploiting its true potential and only
recently Turkey embarked on the path of an enlightened development, which eventually will
make it a respectable country on the international arena. This desire motivated Atatürk to
orientate his country towards the West and to limit or even sever ties with its Middle Eastern
neighbors, commonly regarded as backward traitors, whom one cannot trust. That is why in
the initial republican period of Turkish history the role conception of an internal developer
was very quickly embraced, however, it was not the only one favored by Atatürk.
The role conception of an independent signaled after the foundation of Turkish
CEU eTD Collection
Republic that Turkey was a sovereign country and its foreign policy was based on the will of
the people and not the will of foreign powers and Turkey would enter only alliances which
would not challenge its sovereignty. Such foreign policy was also partially the result of the
trauma inflicted on the Turkish people by the Sèvres treaty, which envisaged the partition of
the Ottoman Empire among the victorious World War I powers. The Sèvres Treaty was the
foundation of the mistrust of Turkish elites towards foreign powers, which found an
expression in the popular saying that "for a Turk no one can be a friend except another Turk".
44
Atatürkcülük, III, Intellectual system of Atatürkism, Istanbul 1984, p. 123.
20
As a result of both the Sèvres Treaty and Atatürk's desire to shield the young republic from its
hostile neighbors and other powers, Turkish foreign policy has been deeply entrenched in a
cautious, risk-averse and inward-looking paradigm of international affairs. The elite
responsible for the formulation and execution of foreign policy has been tasked with
maintaining this orientation after the death of Atatürk in 1935 and adhering strictly to his
principles.
The only significant external stimuli which managed to modify Turkish foreign policy
during its republican period before the end of the Cold War was the end of World War II and
Turkey's alignment with the pro-Western camp, firmly confirmed by its entry into NATO in
1952. I argue that by joining NATO, Turkey abandoned its role conception of an independent,
because it chose one of the sides of the Cold War conflict and from that moment adhered to
the role conception of an internal developer and a faithful ally. Turkey's decision to join
NATO was primarily motivated by security and not ideological concerns, on the other hand,
Turkey did not shun from its duties of an ally, it did for example send a sizeable number of
troops to fight alongside other UN troops in the Korean War, and it did so barely a year after
it joined NATO. However, the fulfillment of Turkish military commitments did not
significantly alter other aspects of Turkish foreign policy such as its cautious character and
CEU eTD Collection
high degree of securitization, lack of significant involvement in regional affairs, risk-aversion
and the Sèvres syndrome.
Turkish foreign policy and its national role conceptions were not significantly
challenged during the entire Cold War period, which can be by and large attributed to Turkish
military's role as the guardian of Atatürk's legacy. Any attempt to revise Kemalist
cornerstones met with the reaction of the military, which intervened in 1960, 1971 and 1980
by launching coup d'états and seizing power. It was only at the end of Cold War that Turkey's
foreign policy paradigm was challenged by president Turgut Özal, who recognized new
21
opportunities for Turkey given by the demise of the Soviet Union and the Cold War order.
Özal was first to recognize the constraints of the Kemalist role conceptions and attempted to
carefully revise them, without upsetting the military establishment. He believed Turkey was
an important regional power and needed to act as one.45 However, for the military circles
Turkey still faced a number of enemies abroad, who wanted to dismember its territory, just as
they did with Yugoslavia and Soviet Union. Hence, Turkey had to be cautious, shun
adventurist foreign policy and focus on defending itself from domestic as well as from foreign
enemies46. Özal found the military to be a prisoner of the redundant Kemalist mindset, lacking
a strategic vision, a term now commonly used by foreign minister Davutoğlu. He had a new
vision for his country, which recurs in his speeches:
"People are not the servants of the state, but the state must be servant of the people.
The next century will be a Turkish century.
Turkey cannot be prisoner of the Misak-i Milli (National Pact) borders."47
It was Özal who challenged the old national role conception of an internal developer
without undermining the faithful ally role conception. Actually, he managed to simultaneously
reinforce the faithful ally role conception, by aligning Turkey with the United States during
the Desert Storm operation, a decision which also indicated his desire for Turkey to become a
regional leader. However, a more pronounced vision of Turkey as a regional leader could be
CEU eTD Collection
found in Özal's statements about the Turkic world "from the Adriatic to the Chinese Wall"
and his efforts to strengthen Turkey's position in the region, for example by forming the Black
Sea Economic Cooperation zone. Özal argued that:
"Many things have changed in Turkey . . . My conviction is that Turkey should leave its former
passive and hesitant policies and engage in active foreign policy. . . The reason I made this call is
because we are a powerful country in the region."48
45
Berdal Aral, Dispensing with Tradition? Turkish Politics and International Society during the Özal Decade,
1983-93, [in] Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (Jan., 2001), p. 79.
46
Sedat Laçiner, Turgut Özal Period in Turkish Foreign Policy: Özalism, [in] USAK Yearbook of International
Politics and Law, Vol. 2, 2009, p. 175.
47
Turgut Özal quoted [in] Sedat Laçiner, op.cit., p. 153.
48
Milliyet, 3 March 1991.
22
Another role conception introduced to the Turkish foreign policy discourse by Özal,
later to be known by many as Neo-Ottomanist, was the one of a bridge, which Turkey
embodied by spanning two continents, two religions, multiple identities and ethnic groups.
Lerna Yanık argues that due to the collapse of the Cold War order Turkey did not have to play
the role of NATO's eastern flank anymore and needed to come up with a new role conception
for itself to highlight "the country's continued important role"49. This role conception had to
correspond to the perception of Turkey Özal had in mind:
“We are an Islamic country. We have differences from the West… We are the bridge between the
West and the East. We need to take the science, technology, thinking, understanding, and compromise
of the West. But we have also our own values that the West do not have."50
This statement demonstrated the willingness of Özal to combine elements of East and West in
the construction of Turkish identity, which according to him, had to embrace all citizens, be
more inclusive and should not shun its Ottoman heritage. Although visionary and challenging
to the deeply entrenched Kemalist establishment, Özal has not managed to achieve a longlasting reorientation of Turkish foreign policy. However, he has inspired many and his legacy
has been eagerly embraced by AKP. Although the death of Özal his ideas were largely
forgotten or at best neglected, he brought new language to the Turkish foreign policy
discourse, one which was unimaginable in the times prior to his presidency but became
CEU eTD Collection
common after his death, as evidenced by the speech of foreign minister Ismail Cem:
"It is worthwhile to note that there are twenty-six countries with which we shared for centuries a
common history, a common state and a common fate. ...In this vast socio-political geography, Turkey,
...has optimal conditions to contribute to stability and to enjoy the opportunities presented by the new
'Eurasian Order'. By virtue of historical and cultural attributes and its privileged double-identity,
European as well as Asia, Turkey is firmly positioned to become the strategic 'Center' of Eurasia"51
49
Lerna K. Yanık, Constructing Turkish "exceptionalism": Discourses of liminality and hybridity in the postCold War Turkish foreign policy, [in] Political Geography 30 (2011), p. 536.
50
Turgut Özal quoted [in] Muhittin Ataman, Leadership Change: Özal leadership and restructuring in Turkish
foreign policy, [in] Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Affairs, Volume 1, Number 1, Spring 2002, p.
155.
51
Ismail Cem, Preface, [in] Turkey & the World 2010-2020, Emergence of a Global Actor, Istanbul, DIVAK,
1998.
23
It was only in 2002 when Özal's legacy reemerged with the takeover of power by the
Justice and Development Party. Moreover, a new foreign policy discourse, commonly
referred to as Neo-Ottomanist started to appear on the political arena in Turkey. One of the
first steps AKP took to construct a new foreign policy was to discredit the Sèvres syndrome as
a hindrance to the country's development and its quest to achieve a position of regional power,
as evidence by the speeches of then foreign minister, now president Abdullah Gül and current
foreign minister Davutoğlu:
"Remembering the Sèvres and knowing what happened at the time is meaningful, if it enables us to
assess with a common sense our weaknesses and mistakes throughout the course of events that
culminated in the signature of the Treaty of Sèvres; otherwise, if it pacifies us and engenders a sense
of mental submissiveness at the psychological level that causes a defensive attitude, it certainly
hinders our power and paves the way for new Sèvres-like treaties."52
"Surely, we have to be poised to act against the secret schemes on the destiny of our country. I’m not
implying that we should ignore such schemes; but I would like to underline that it is unfair for Turkey
as a great country to be forced to live with a syndrome like that."53
With the Sèvres syndrome disarmed, new Turkish foreign policy elites could embark
on a path of constructing new national role conceptions for their nation. With the arrival of
AKP on the political scene in Turkey, a new rhetoric has gradually been used discursively
when referring to foreign policy. This form of discourse has been called "soft NeoOttomanism" buy Ziya Öniş, who distinguishes it from "hard Neo-Ottomanism" by
highlighting its cultural aspect, new, more inclusive identity and the idea of Turkey as an
CEU eTD Collection
assertive central state54. According to Turkish foreign policy elites their country cannot afford
to be isolationist and defensive but it needs to embrace the Ottoman legacy and recognize its
special role in the region. If it is not the case Turkey risks the following:
"The territories over which [Ottoman] sovereignty was forfeited were also abandoned immediately in
a hurry to defend the rest within new borders. This [total withdrawal] hindered the development of
auxiliary tactical formulas such as creating spheres of influence within the territories that were inbetween absolute sovereignty and total withdrawal, defending the borders through trans-boundary
52
Ahmet Davutoğlu quoted [in] Kadri Kaan Renda, Politicians as Story-Tellers: Narrative Reconstruction of
Turkish Foreign Policy, http://www.psa.ac.uk/journals/pdf/5/2012/809_431.pdf, last accessed at 15:07, on the
15th of May 2012, p. 4.
53
Abdullah Gül, TBMM Tutanak Dergisi, Vol.105, Session 38, 2005, p.37.
54
Ziya Öniş, interview in Istanbul, 2nd of May 2012.
24
diplomatic initiatives, forming coalitions around its own strategy, leaving behind collaborators in the
lost territories, and exploiting the conflict of interests among great powers in order to gain more room
for tactical maneuvers."55
However, this does not imply any imperial or neo-colonialist notions, quite on the contrary,
Turkey desires to become not only a "central state" but also a "wise country", a term coined
by Ahmet Davutoğlu, which describes Turkey as a state whose voice will be listened to on the
international arena, who will act wisely and proactively in order to find solutions to global
problems56. One of the ways of becoming a "wise country" is to develop Turkey's soft power,
a fact recognized by Turkish foreign policy elites, who want to project a magnified vision of
their country, both at home and abroad:
"Turkish foreign policy is rapidly developing its “soft power” based on persuasion, incentives,
leadership and being an exemplar. As a matter of fact, our objective is to develop our soft power
further. The ideal of a great country could only be fulfilled with such confidence."57
As indicated by the above mentioned statements of Turkish policy makers, they are
not only distancing themselves from the Kemalist vision of their state, they project quite a
new set of roles for Turkey, because they profoundly believe that Turkey possesses the
necessary potential to live up to the roles they articulate. The most vocal proponent and chief
architect of Turkey's new role conceptions has been foreign minister Davutoğlu, who portrays
Turkey as a country possessing a "strategic depth", which enables it to exert greater influence
CEU eTD Collection
in its neighborhood, provided Turkey recognizes this potential and is willing to take
advantage of it. He calls for the transformation of Turkey from a Cold War wing state to a
"central state" and believes Turkey has the potential in a long term to become a global
power58. In order to become a "central state" Turkey needs to pursue a number of role
conceptions envisaged by the AKP policymakers.
55
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Stratejik Derinlik, Küre Yayınları, İstanbul, 2001, quoted [in] Kadri Kaan Renda, op.cit., p.
11.
56
Ahmet Davutoğlu, speech at the Annual Ambassadors’ Conference of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2011.
57
Abdullah Gül, speech given in Bosporus University in Istanbul 2004.
58
Ahmet Sözen, Paradigm Shift in Turkish Foreign Policy: Transition and Challenges, [in] Turkish Studies,
Vol. 11, No. 1, 103-123, March 2010, p. 110.
25
Below I highlight the national role conceptions which are prevalent in the AKP
foreign policy discourse. I have arranged them according to the degree of activity on the
international arena, which is used both by Holsti and Chafetz, Abramson and Grillot their
studies on national role conceptions. My typology merges theirs in order to provide the reader
with a more comprehensive list of national role conceptions, reflecting both the complexity
and the multitude of roles envisaged by Turkish foreign policy elites. I have identified nine
role conceptions of which are frequently articulated by Turkish foreign policy elites.
Regional leader
This role conception reflects both the special ambitions of a country in a given region,
as well as its special obligations and responsibilities towards other states in the region. It is
one of the more pronounced role conceptions articulated by Turkish policymakers, who are
raising awareness of their country's former greatness in order to justify the means which they
use to achieve greatness in contemporary times. This greatness is to be perceived as a natural
outcome of both Turkey's history and its "strategic depth", as indicated in by foreign minister
CEU eTD Collection
Davutoğlu:
"Countries like Turkey, China and Japan have deep historical roots in their regions. . . During the
transit from the 19th to the 20th century; there were eight multinational empires across Eurasia:
Britain, Russia, Austria-Hungary, France, Germany, China, Japan and Turkey. Now these countries
are experiencing very similar problems with their prospective regions. As these countries possess
historical depth they form spheres of influence; if they fail to do this they then experience various
problems."59
"Turkey is not just any old Mediterranean country. One important characteristic that distinguishes
Turkey from say Romania and Greece is that Turkey is at the same time a Middle East and Caucasus
country . . . Indeed, Turkey is as much a Black Sea country as it is a Mediterranean one. This
geographical depth places Turkey right at the epicenter of many geopolitical areas of influence."60
Regional protector
59
The strategic depth that Turkey needs, an interview with Ahmet Davutoğlu, Turkish Daily
News, 15 September 2001.
60
Ibid.
26
This role conception highlights special leadership responsibilities of a particular state
in the region. In the case of Turkey it is nowhere more pronounced than in the references to
the Middle East, although Balkan and North African countries are also frequently portrayed as
deserving special treatment by Turkey because of their Ottoman past. Turkish foreign policy
elites regularly articulate Turkey's special responsibility towards the people in its region; be it
Bosnian Muslims or Iraqi Sunnis. Turkey desires to become "an order instituting state" in the
region and is "developing a strongly pronounced sense of responsibility to provide stability
for the people and countries of the region with which it shares a common historical past"61, as
evidenced by the following statements:
"Turkey should make its role of a peripheral country part of its past, and appropriate a new position:
one of providing security and stability not only for itself, but also for its neighboring regions."62
"Turkey should guarantee its own security and stability by taking on a more active, constructive role to
provide order, stability and security in its environs."63
"Turkey now enjoys an image as a responsible state which provides order and security in the region."64
"Beyond representing the 70 million people of Turkey, we have a historic debt to those lands where
there are Turks or which was related to our land in the past. We have to repay this debt in the best
way."65
CEU eTD Collection
"All these lands, all these regions are our tarihdaş. As the state of Turkish republic we are obliged to
protect the rights of our citizens, as a nation preserving the past ties with our tarihdaş is our historical
mission. In this context, regardless of their ethnic and sectarian origins, we are determined to embrace
all of our tarihdaş and eliminate all the existing barriers between us and our tarihdaş; this is why, we
are pursuing region-wide policies; this is why, we are establishing trilateral and multilateral
mechanisms; and this is why, we are in pursuit of new initiatives within our bilateral relations."66
According to Kadri Kaan Renda, Davutoğlu coined the term tarihdaş67 to imply a
sense of common heritage, togetherness and belonging to the larger group of people, which
61
Bülent Aras and Aylin Görener, "National role conceptions and foreign policy orientation; the ideational
bases of the Justice and Development Party's foreign policy activism in the Middle East" [in] Journal of Balkan
and Near Eastern Studies, Volume 12, Number 1, March 2010, p. 83.
62
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Turkey Foreign Policy Vision: an Assessment of 2007, [in] Insight Turkey, Vol. 10, No. 1,
p. 79.
63
Ibid., p. 79.
64
Ibid., p. 83.
65
Ahmet Davutoğlu quoted [in] Srdja Trifković, Turkey as a regional power: Neo-Ottomanism in Action,
http://www.balkanstudies.org/articles/neo-ottomanism-action-turkey-regional-power.
66
Ahmet Davutoğlu, TBMM Tutanak Dergisi Vol.87, Session.37, 2011, p. 70.
67
Tarih meaning history and -daş meaning togetherness.
27
share their past and, hence are more inclined to cooperate and accept the regional leadership
of Turkey as the legitimate heir of the Ottoman Empire.68
"I believe that Turkey has a lot to do in the Middle East. We are aware of this responsibility. We are
here for this."69
"We do not see the Syrian issue as an external affair. The Syrian question is our internal affair.
Because we share with them a border of 850 kilometers. We have ties of kinship, history and culture.
Therefore, we cannot passively watch what is happening. We need to do whatever is necessary."70
"...we considered all people of the region as our eternal brothers irrespective of their background and
saw it our duty to dampen sectarian tensions."71
However, as indicated above, the role conception of a regional protector could also
imply the Turkish desire to interfere into domestic affairs of its neighboring countries,
something those countries may not wish, still harboring negative memories of the Ottoman
past. This role conception could also be potentially perceived as the lynchpin of a "hard" or
"offensive" Neo-Ottomanism, a perception Turkey would like to avoid since it may threaten
to undermine its efforts to build friendly relations in its neighborhood.
Mediator-integrator
The role conception of a mediator-integrator is projected by governments, which see
themselves "as capable of, or responsible for, fulfilling or undertaking special tasks to
reconcile conflicts between other states or groups of states"72. This role conception has not
CEU eTD Collection
been as strongly pronounced by Turkish policymakers as the above mentioned ones, but it has
been increasingly often articulated in the recent years, as exemplified below:
"Turkey’s efforts are focused on bringing together the parties in order to solve or preempt
conflicts..."73
68
Kadri Kaan Renda, op. cit., p. 11.
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkish Daily News, 2 May 2005.
70
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, http://www.haberturk.com/dunya/haber/656181-erdogan-davutoglunu-samagonderiyor, last accessed at 16:18, 15th of May 2012.
71
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Principles of Turkish Foreign Policy and Regional Political Structuring, op. cit., p. 5.
72
K. J. Holsti, 1970, op. cit., p. 265.
73
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Interview by Mr. Ahmet Davutoğlu published in AUC Cairo Review (Egypt) on 12 March
2012, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/interview-by-mr_-ahmet-davuto%C4%9Flu-published-in-auc-cairo-review_egypt_-on-12-march-2012.en.mfa, last accessed at 17:51, on the 20th of May 2012.
69
28
"Turkey's Lebanon policy, its attempts to mediate between Syria and Israel and achieve Palestinian
reconciliation, its efforts to facilitate the participation of Iraqi Sunni groups in the 2005 parliamentary
elections, and its constructive involvement in the Iranian nuclear issue are integral parts of Turkey's
foreign-policy vision for the Middle East."74
"Consider Turkey's mediation between Israel and Syria, a role that was not assigned to Turkey by any
outside actor. Other examples of pre-emptive diplomacy include Turkey's efforts to achieve SunniShiite reconciliation in Iraq, reconciliation efforts in Lebanon and Palestine, the Serbia-Bosnia
reconciliation in the Balkans, dialogue between Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the reconstruction of
Darfur and Somalia."75
Regional sub-system collaborator
This role conception envisages a long-term commitment to "...cooperative efforts with
other states to build wider communities"76. In this way it differs from the mediator-integrator
role conceptions, which implies an occasional intervention into conflict prevention rather than
undertaking comprehensive measures to create sustainable peace and stability in the region.
Turkish foreign policy elites have at numerous occasions expressed their country's desire to
become a major propeller of regional cooperation, as evidenced below:
"Before we came to power, we promised that we would develop relations with our neighbors and
included this in our action plan. We did not make any discrimination among our neighbors. Regional
peace will be set up this way."77
"Today, it is important for Turkey to establish its position in the Middle East. This position must rest
on four main principles. First of all, security for everyone, not only for this group or that group, this
country or that country, but common security for the entire region."78
"We are ready to do everything in our power to ensure peace and stability in the region."79
CEU eTD Collection
"It has to take on the role of an order-instituting country in all these regions. …Turkey is no longer a
country which only reacts to crises, but notices the crises before their emergence and intervenes in the
crises effectively, and gives shape to the order of its surrounding region."80
“Why is it so important for Turkey, we are right at the center of all these earthquakes, in geo-political
earthquakes from Balkans to Central Asia. Turkey is right at the center. And all of the crises were
directly or indirectly, historically and culturally, were related to Turkey.”81
74
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Turkey's Zero-Problems Foreign Policy, Foreign Policy,
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/05/20/turkeys_zero_problems_foreign_policy?page=0,1&hidecomm
ents=yes, last accessed at 00:40, on the 21st of May 2012.
75
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Ibid.
76
K. J. Holsti, 1970, op. cit., p. 265.
77
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkish Daily News, 29 July 2004.
78
Ahmet Davutoğlu, op. cit., p. 84.
79
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkish Daily News, 4 January, 2009.
80
Ahmet Davutoğlu quoted [in] New FM Davutoğlu to build order-instituting role for Turkey,
http://www.todayszaman.com/newsDetail_getNewsById.action?load=detay&link=174284, last accessed at 1:10,
on the 20th of May 2012.
29
"Turkey’s growing influences in the region, the variety of means and capabilities available to us, as
well as our unique geographic location have increased our soft power substantially. And we are ready
to project that soft power to help bring security, stability and prosperity to a multitude of
geographies."82
"At the regional level, our vision is a regional order that is built on representative political systems
reflecting the legitimate demands of the people where regional states are fully integrated to each other
around the core values of democracy and true economic interdependence."83
"One strength of our foreign policy, thus, is the ongoing process of reconnecting with the people in our
region with whom we shared a common history and are poised to have a common destiny. This
objective will continue to shape our foreign policy priorities, and we will not take steps that will
alienate us from the hearts and minds of our region’s people for short-term political calculations. This
objective also means that we will seek to reconcile our differences with neighboring countries by
engaging in a soul-searching effort and moving beyond the disputes that have divided us."84
Global sub-system collaborator
This role conception implies states' desire to shape the global order by actively
participating in various international forums and committing itself to undertake efforts aimed
at establishing a stronger, more inclusive and fair international order. As it was mentioned
before, Turkish foreign policy elites' desire is to make their country a global power in a long
term perspective, they set an ambitious goal for Turkey to become the 10th largest economy
on earth by 2023, the centennial anniversary of the establishment of the Republic of Turkey.
The AKP leadership perceives that the growth of Turkish economy should be accompanied by
Turkey's increased posture on the international arena and, this desire is demonstrated in the
CEU eTD Collection
following statements of Erdoğan, Gül and Davutoğlu:
"From now on, neither the world can carry on without Turkey nor Turkey can carry on without the
world. Our country is in the process of becoming a global player and this is an irreversible process."85
"Turkey’s aim is to intervene consistently in global issues using international platforms, which
signifies a transformation for Turkey from a central country to a global power."86
81
Ahmet Davutoğlu quoted [in] Turkey Seeks to Be International Mediation Center,
http://www.turkishnews.com/en/content/2012/03/04/turkey-seeks-to-be-international-mediation-center, last
accessed at 1:00, on the 20th of May 2012.
82
Abdullah Gül, speech given at the German Marshall Fund, 2007.
83
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Principles of Turkish Foreign Policy and Regional Political Structuring, [in] Turkey
Policy Brief Series, 2012 Third Edition, http://www.mfa.gov.tr/site_media/html/bakanmakale_tepev.pdf, last
accessed at 8:59, on the 20th of May 2012, p. 5.
84
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Ibid., p. 2.
85
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkish Daily News, 5 February 2005.
86
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Turkey Foreign Policy Vision: an Assessment of 2007, op. cit., p. 87.
30
"The essential of our visionary policy is that global order must be inclusive, participatory, equalitarian
and overarching. We are willing to be a spokesperson of such global order”87
"Through increasing ties with neighbors, Turkey will be better positioned to play its role as a
responsible country at the global level."88
"We have already expressed our readiness to assume the responsibilities of a global actor, and set
ourselves the objective to be reckoned as a wise country in the international community. [...] As a wise
country, i.e. a responsible member of the international community, we aspire to enhance our capability
to shape the course of developments around us and make a valuable contribution to the resolution of
regional and international issues."89
"Turkey now enjoys an image of an responsible state which provides order and security to the region,
one that prioritizes democracy and liberties, while dealing competently with security problems at
home. Turkey's aim is to intervene consistently in global issues using international platforms, which
signifies a transformation for Turkey from a central country to a global power."90
"In today’s emerging world order Turkey is perceived as one of the actors that can shape the dynamics
of the 21st century. This [perception] does not only rest on our strategic and geographic location, our
greatness and our military forces. Apart from these, the importance attributed by others to Turkey has
enhanced owing to our success to blend our traditional values with contemporary norms, our positive
influence on spreading stability in our environment, in other words, our ability to utilize our soft
power, our greatness. Up until now Turkey’s image has been considered aggressive; now Turkey is a
country whose power is well known, who has a great history, whose potential is high, and who aims to
solve problems through communication and dialogue"91
"... Turkey feels itself well-poised to play an important role in addressing the challenges of the 21st
century."92
"At the global level, we will aspire to build in a participatory manner a new international
order that is inclusive of the international community at large."93
According to Davutoğlu Turkey is poised to take a role of one of the planners of the
global order in the near future, because “people all around the world are expecting us to act
CEU eTD Collection
like a wise country”94. The statements above also indicate a sense of grandeur and selfconfidence, features typical for aspiring powers.
Developer
87
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Ibid.
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Principles of Turkish Foreign Policy and Regional Political Structuring, op. cit., p. 2.
89
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Ibid., p. 3.
90
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Turkey Foreign Policy Vision: an Assessment of 2007, op.cit., p. 83.
91
Abdullah Gül, TBMM Tutanak Dergisi Vol.70 Session 39, 2004.
92
Abdullah Gül, speech given at the American Turkish Council, 2004.
93
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Principles of Turkish Foreign Policy and Regional Political Structuring, op. cit., p. 5.
94
Ahmet Davutoğlu, speech at the Annual Ambassadors’ Conference of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2010.
88
31
This role conception has only recently started to be articulated in the foreign policy
discourse of AKP and , it envisages Turkey as a country with a special duty to assist less
developed countries:
"...Turkey has become an emerging donor, conducting various development projects through its own
agencies. Turkey is determined to help the least developed countries with a long-term commitment."95
Example
The role conception of an example is positioned fairly low in Holsti's typology;
however, in today's increasingly interdependent world this role conception can be regarded as
more active than in Holsti's study. This role conception implies not only serving as a model
for other countries to follow but also a desire to gain prestige on the international arena, as
evidenced in the statements of Turkish policymakers:
"Turkey has achieved what people said could never be achieved—a balance between Islam,
democracy, secularism and modernity. [Our government] demonstrates that a religious person can
protect the idea of secularism. In the West, the AKP is always portrayed as being ‘rooted in religion’.
This is not true. The AKP is not a party just for religiously observant people—we are the party of the
average Turk. We are absolutely against ethnic nationalism, regional nationalism and religious
chauvinism. Turkey, with its democracy, is a source of inspiration to the rest of the Islamic world."96
"With its stability, success in development, status within the West, rich historical
heritage and identity, Turkey will be a symbol of harmony of civilizations for the
21st century."97
"Turkey in its region and especially in the Middle East will be a guide in overcoming instability, a
driving force for economic development, and a reliable partner in ensuring
security."98
CEU eTD Collection
"If our foreign policy were not so active people in the region would not see us as a model."99
Bridge
95
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Interview by Mr. Ahmet Davutoğlu published in AUC Cairo Review (Egypt) on 12 March
2012, op. cit.
96
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Newsweek, 12 May 2008.
97
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkish Daily News, 9 July 2005.
98
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Conservative Democracy and the Globalization of Freedom, speech at the American
Enterprise Institute, 29 January 2004.
99
Interview by H.E. Ahmet Davutoğlu published in The Australian Newspaper (Australia) on 21 January 2012,
http://www.mfa.gov.tr/interview-by-h_e_-ahmet-davuto%C4%9Flu-published-in-the-australian-newspaper_australia_-on-21-january-2012.en.mfa, last accessed at 8:50, on the 20th of May 2012.
32
The role conception of a bridge implies acting as a "...translator or conveyor of
messages and information between peoples of different cultures."100 It used to be more
pronounced in the early period of AKP rule, as evidenced by the following statements:
“At a time that people are talking of a clash of civilizations, Turkey is a natural bridge of civilizations.
All we are trying to do is use our position to bring Islam and the West closer together.”101
"The effects of having diverse Caucasian, Balkan, Middle Eastern, Iraqi Turcoman and
Anatolian elements, even in small groups, are seen in everyday life in today’s Turkey,
where diverse cultural elements meet under the umbrella of the Turkish state."102
" Turkey has a special role in strengthening dialogue between religions due to its location at the
intersection of Asia and Europe."103
"Turkey has a special role as a pivotal state between Europe and Asia."104
However, currently Turkish policymakers are less keen on using this term and prefer
to call Turkey a pivotal, or more recently, a central state. According to Davutoğlu, Turkey
should become a "central state", with extensive links to its neighboring regions, a state with a
capacity to institute a regional order and not just the outpost of the West in the East or of the
East in the West. Hence he does not endorse the metaphor of Turkey as a bridge between
continents and cultures. In an interview given in 2008, he stressed Turkey's uniqueness by
saying it should not be seen "as a bridge country, which only connects two points, nor a
frontier country, nor indeed as an ordinary country, that sits at the edge of the Muslim world
CEU eTD Collection
or the West, but rather as a central country"105.
Faithfull ally
This role conception seems to be articulated by Turkish foreign policy elites mostly in
response to claims that Turkey is leaving the West or switching alliances, hence Turkish
100
K. J. Holsti, 1970, op. cit., p. 266,
Abdullah Gül quoted [in] Amir Taheri, “Turkey’s Bid to Raise Its Islamic Profile and Court Europe May
Backfire,” Arab View, http://archive.arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=52442&d=6&m=10&y=2004,
last accessed at 15:32, on the 14th of May 2012.
102
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Turkey Foreign Policy Vision: an Assessment of 2007, op. cit., p. 79.
103
Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, Turkish Daily News, 17 May 2005.
104
Nathan Gardels interview with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, “A Union of Civilizations,” New Perspectives
Quarterly, Vol. 24. Iss. 3, 2007, p. 27.
105
Lerna K. Yanık, op.cit., p. 87.
101
33
policymakers feel the need to reaffirm their commitment to NATO, which is exemplified in
the following statements:
"The European Union and NATO are the most important pillars of the policy of setting a balance
between security and freedom."106
"...NATO is still the cornerstone of our defense and security policy.[...] Turkey’s membership of
NATO is also an integral part of her global identity. Turkey proceeds to take part in missions and
operations on collective defense and crisis management within NATO."107
As evidenced above, Turkish policy makers in the past decade have been projecting a
much greater number of national role conceptions for their state than ever before in the
republican history of Turkey. New role conceptions gained a particular prominence such as
regional leader and regional protector, whereas others such as faithful ally became more
marginal. Holsti's theory of role conceptions is well-applicable to Turkish foreign policy as
indicated above, yet it does not explain the emergence of different perceptions of role
conceptions. It does not come as a surprise that a number of analysts and scholars interpret
the shift in national role conceptions as a genuinely new foreign policy conceptualization, and
they label it as "Neo-Ottomanist", a name which has imperial notions, referring to Turkish
Ottoman history. Since the term "Neo-Ottomanism" does not resonate positively in most
countries in Turkey's neighborhood, it is rejected by Turkish policymakers. Despite fairly
clearly formulated national conceptions, they seem to overshadowed in the foreign policy
CEU eTD Collection
discourse by the term "Neo-Ottomanism", which is used to describe the entire foreign policy
of the AKP elites. Nevertheless, I need to analyze the reasons for the emergence of the NeoOttomanist foreign policy discourse, which accompanies the emergence of new national role
conceptions in Turkish foreign policy.
106
Ahmet Davutoğlu quoted [in] New FM Davutoğlu to build order-instituting role for Turkey, op. cit.
Ahmet Davutoğlu, Interview by Mr. Ahmet Davutoğlu published in AUC Cairo Review (Egypt) on 12 March
2012, op. cit.
107
34
4. Neo-Ottomanism: The discursive formulation of the recent Turkish
foreign policy conceptualizations.
Before I attempt to define Neo-Ottomanism, it is necessary to first to refer to the
original idea of Ottomanism (Osmanlıcılık) which inspired its modern form. Yılmaz Çolak
defines Ottomanism as an ideology of modern political patriotism that emerged during the
Tanzimat108 period (1839) and became the official line of the Ottoman Empire in the
remaining part of the nineteenth century.109 According to him Ottomanism was an attempt to
modernize the outdated millet110 system of the Ottoman Empire by simultaneously retaining it
and granting equal civil and political rights to all Ottoman subjects regardless of their religion
which had been the dominant factor determining social status in the Empire. Proponents of
Ottomanism advocated the idea of "a common homeland and common traits based on modern
patriotic citizenship and universal law, which was developed to provide Ottoman unity in the
context of each ethnic-religious group's efforts to develop its own nationalism"111. The
ultimate goal was the creation of a modern Ottoman nation whose unity was not to be
threatened by sectarian divisions but it would be sustained by citizens sharing a collective
Ottoman identity regardless of their ethnic or religious background. The Ottoman identity was
CEU eTD Collection
supposed to become the primary one, whereas religious and ethnic identities were supposed to
be of secondary importance and the state should disregard them in its treatment of citizens. In
other words, Ottomanism foresaw an emergence of the Ottoman Empire as a melting pot of
108
Tanzimat was the period of reforms, instituted in the Ottoman Empire between 1839 and 1876 with the aim of
modernizing it in face of growing nationalist sentiment among its primarily European subjects and attempts of
European powers to destabilize it and dismember its territory.
109
Yılmaz Çolak, Ottomanism vs. Kemalism: Collective Memory and Cultural Pluralism in 1990s Turkey, [in]
Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 42, No. 4, 587-602, July 2006, p. 589.
110
Millets were confessional communities in the Ottoman Empire, having a special legal status with own judicial
system separate for Muslim, Christian and Jewish communities which were governing many of their matters
independently.
111
Yılmaz Çolak, op.cit., p. 589.
35
various religions and ethnic groups coexisting peacefully and establishing a modern
citizenship and abandoning theocracy.
Interestingly, Tanzimat is not only a period associated with the emergence of
Ottomanism (Çolak), but according to Ahmet Sözen, it was also a period where the origins of
Neo-Ottomanism can be traced back to. He characterizes it as a movement of liberal
intellectuals who were discontent with the character of Tanzimat reforms, considering them
imitative and superficial and advocating reforms through internal dynamics, calling for
restrictions on the monarchy and establishment of a parliament, some of them such as the poet
Namık Kemal attempting to synthesize Islam and democracy112. Yet, according to Ebru ErenWebb, the first appearance of Neo-Ottomanism as an idea can be associated with the
Democrat Party in 1950s, which in comparison to previous governments assigned more space
to the Ottoman past and religious issues, both in public life as well as in education113. One
could even go as far as to argue that prime minister Adnan Menderes was the first NeoOttoman in power in the republican history of Turkey, as he was the first Turkish head of
government who attempted to expand Turkish foreign policy to the East by signing the
Baghdad Pact and strengthening Turkey's relations with Iraq, Iran and Pakistan. Finally, the
origin of the term is attributed, according to Kemal Karpat, to the Greeks, who coined it after
CEU eTD Collection
Turkey invaded Northern Cyprus in 1974114. However, they did not fill it with a specific
meaning, merely having applied a convenient label evoking Ottoman Empire as an aggressor
and occupier of Greek lands. Hence the term from its very inception has had a negative
connection in Turkey's neighborhood. The term was also used by David Barchard when
referring to Turkey's Middle East policies in the 1980's. Barchard claims that "consciousness
of imperial Ottoman past is a much more politically potent force in Turkey than Islam and as
112
Ahmet Sözen, op.cit., p. 106.
Ebru Eren-Webb, To which Eurasia does Turkey belong? A comparative analysis of Turkish Eurasianist
geopolitical discourses, [in] Boğaziçi Joural, Vol. 25, no. 2 (2011), pp. 59-82, p. 78.
114
Kemal H. Karpat, Studies on Turkish Politics and Society. Selected articles and essays, Brill Academic Pub,
Leiden, 2004, p. 641.
113
36
Turkey regains economic strength , it will be increasingly tempted to assert itself in the
Middle East".115
The re-emergence of Neo-Ottomanism is in fact commonly attributed to Turkish prime
minister (1983-1989) and later president (1989-1993) Turgut Özal, who laid the foundations
for a foreign policy which departed from some of the cornerstones of Kemalism116 by
pursuing a vision of a more pluralistic, multicultural and inclusive state coupled with an active
foreign policy. According to Sedat Laçiner, Özal was the creator of the new Neo-Ottomanist
foreign policy117, however, as argued by Nicholas Danforth, Neo-Ottomanism has not been
closely associated with any clear and consistent definition, which may lead to confusion when
used nowadays118. According to Danforth, Özal was looking at the Ottoman times for a model
of mitigating ethnic and religious tensions and incorporating various cultures and identities,
going as far as drawing parallels between the political structures of United States and the
Ottoman Empire as the two entities which acted as melting pots for various peoples, religions
and cultures. His admiration of America went as far as having a dream of turning Turkey into
another America, that is, a country of secularism, yet with a religious zeal of its population, of
democracy, capitalism and liberalism119. Özal attempted to reexamine and reevaluate Ottoman
history so that it could become a source of national pride, rather than national shame, as it had
CEU eTD Collection
been previously indirectly implied in the political discourse. This reexamination started,
according to Graham Fuller in the early 1990's, when Turkey displayed a renewed interest in
the territories and people of its former Empire, and he foresees an emergence of "certain
115
David Barchard, Turkey and the West, [in] Chatham House Papers, Routledge & Kegan Paul, London,
Boston and Henley, 1985, p. 91.
116
Murinson Alexander, The Strategic Depth Doctrine of Turkish Foreign Policy, [in] Middle Eastern Studies,
Vol. 42, No. 6, November 2006.
117
Sedat Laçiner, op. cit., 156.
118
Nicholas Danforth, Ideology and Pragmatism in Turkish Foreign Policy: From Atatürk to the AKP, [in]
Turkish Policy Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 3, 2008, p. 90.
119
Sedat Laçiner, op.cit., p. 170.
37
organic geopolitical, cultural, and economic relations in the new 'normal' regional
environment that had been absent during the 'abnormal' period of Cold War polarization"120.
This "normality" shall be achieved by a process of reconciliation with its own
forgotten and neglected history, as argued by Hadi Uluengin, who suggests that NeoOttomanism is an attempt at achieving this normality by bringing back and reviving the
memories of the Ottoman past without glorifying it and without demonizing the republican
period of Turkish history but giving both of them their just place in history and national
narrative121. Uluengin rejects the chauvinist, imperialist and revisionist notions of NeoOttomanism, reassuring his readers that although history does not repeat itself, according to
the Neo-Ottomanist vision it renews itself.122 Hence, instead of an inward-looking national
psyche, Turks should re-discover their imperial past not to make revisionist claims but to do
justice to the achievements of the Ottoman era such as the relative religious tolerance and
peaceful coexistence of various ethnic and religious groups. Zülfü Livaneli acknowledges the
significance of the Ottoman past and Ottoman cultural legacy in the former domains of the
empire but is reluctant to embrace Neo-Ottomanism as a political doctrine, instead preferring
to opt for some form of cultural affinity and solidarity, one that could possibly resemble the
one of Spain and Latin American countries123.
CEU eTD Collection
Neo-Ottomanism has been viewed differently, however by Cengiz Çandar, regarded
by many analysts and scholars as one of main (re)inventors of the term in modern times.
Cengiz Çandar has been one of the staunchest supporters of Turgut Özal's new opening in
foreign policy and used to refer to his political master as the "Neo-Ottoman of the 21st
120
Fuller, Graham, Turkey faces East: New orientations toward the Middle East and the Old Soviet Union, Rand
Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, 1992, p. 13.
121
Ali Fuat Borovalı, Post-modernity, Multiculturalism and ex-imperial hinterland: Habsburg and Ottoman
legacies revisited, [in] Perceptions, December 1997-February 1998 Volume II - Number 4, p. 4.
122
Ali Fuat Borovalı, Ibid., p. 4.
123
Ali Fuat Borovalı, Ibid., p. 4.
38
century"124, he has also been a prolific journalist and author advocating an imperial vision to
give Turkey an impetus to move from a monocultural and closed nation-state to pluralist
multicultural and multiethnic structure125. However, Çandar's vision does not contradict the
most famous principle of Turkish foreign policy, commonly attributed to Atatürk himself,
"Peace at home, peace in the world", Çandar merely calls for an necessary reinterpretation and
adjustment of this principle to contemporary conditions126. Yet Çandar seeks inspiration for
solving contemporary challenges in history by viewing Neo-Ottomanism as "an exercise of
understanding how the Ottomans did it"127, and he believes that one could employ some
aspects of the Ottoman rule such as peaceful coexistence, pluralism and cosmopolitanism to
elevate Turkey to the status of a great country, status currently unachievable due to Turkey's
restrictive and inward-looking Kemalist policies. To sum up, the shift from Kemalism to NeoOttomanism, attributed by Çandar to Turgut Özal, meant the "funeral of Kemalism"128.
However, the most important theoretical foundation for the revision of Turkish foreign
policy has been given in the book "Strategic depth" authored by the current foreign minister
of Turkey Ahmet Davutoğlu. Most scholars see the reasons for the departure from Kemalism
in the collapse of the bipolar world, where Turkey was a staunchly pro-Western state, NATO
member and an important regional ally of the United States. Most authors also agree that in
CEU eTD Collection
order to take advantage of its unique geopolitical and cultural location, Turkey needed to
reexamine its foreign policy and develop a new, ambitious foreign policy, one of a country
desiring to become a regional and global player129.
This reexamination, which has been taking place during the past decade, has been
eagerly labeled as "Neo-Ottomanism" by various authors, and equally eagerly refuted by
124
Ali Fuat Borovalı, Ibid., p. 4.
Yılmaz Çolak, op.cit., p. 593.
126
Cengiz Çandar and Graham E. Fuller, Grand Geopolitics for a New Turkey, [in] Mediterranean Quarterly:
Winter 2001, p. 23.
127
Ahmet Sözen, op. cit., p. 107.
128
Sedat Laçiner, op. cit., 156.
129
Nora Fischer Onar, Neo Ottomanism, historical legacies and Turkish foreign policy, [in] Discussion Paper
Series, 2009/03, October 2009, p. 1.
125
39
Turkish policymakers, who realize that the term may evoke certain imperials notions, which
they strongly deny. I have inquired on the developments of the Neo-Ottomanist debate in
Turkey during my interviews, and according to Ziya Öniş, a scholar from Koç University, the
term "Neo-Ottomanism" is too strong for the ones who think that Turkey is basically pursuing
a pragmatic approach, driven by security and economic interests130. On the other hand, the
economic aspect of Turkish foreign policy has been frequently highlighted by all of my
interviewees as a factor which enabled Turkey to pursue a more assertive, independent and
ambitious foreign policy. In other words; Turkish foreign policy is catching up with the robust
growth of Turkish economy, hence it is not surprising that Turkey desires to become one of
the architects of the new global order, working closely with BRIC countries, Ioannis
Grigoriadis actually calls Turkey "a minor BRIC state"131.
During my interviews in Turkey I have identified various opinions on the sources of
Neo-Ottomanist discourse. According to Ziya Öniş it must have originated outside of Turkey
in order to demonstrate that Turkey is drifting away from Europe and is usually used by the
critics of AKP's foreign policy132. A similar view is shared by Erdem Kaya, who believes that
Neo-Ottomanism was initiated by some like-minded analysts who viewed Turkey turning to
the south and east as an alternative to the West, but according to him in fact Turkey is trying
CEU eTD Collection
to enrich its foreign relations, expand their scope but they are not an alternative to the West.133
On the other hand both Ioannis Grigoriadis and Yusuf Çınar would look for the origins of the
Neo-Ottomanist discourse in Turkey, particularly during the tenure of Turgut Özal, when
Cengiz Çandar started to use it for the first time, often in reference to Bosnia, where
according to him, Turkish culture was alive due to the Ottoman legacy.134 Grigoriadis adds to
this that the discourse itself is not new, because it also resonates among Kemalist and Ismail
130
Ziya Öniş, interview in Istanbul, 2nd of May 2012.
Ioannis Grigoriadis, interview in Ankara, 3rd of May, 2012.
132
Ziya Öniş, interview in Istanbul, 2nd of May 2012.
133
Erdem Kaya, interview in Istanbul, 2nd of May 2012.
134
Yusuf Çınar, interview in Konya, 4th of May 2012.
131
40
Cem as a foreign minister in the 90's and Eurasian Kemalists have been calling for a policy
similar to the one currently pursued by AKP; however, what has changed is that the Turkish
economic success gave a new impetus for and could sustain an ambitious foreign policy.135
This ambitious foreign policy manifests itself in the re-formulation of national role
conceptions, but this re-formulation seems be perceived in different ways by its proponents
and its critics, and it is the critics, who tend to use the term Neo-Ottomanism136. For example,
Yunus Yılmaz argues that Turkey is nowadays pursuing a value-based policy, prioritizing
values over interests137, however those policies are viewed with skepticism by Ariel Cohen
who states, that they jeopardize the relationship with the United States by unilaterally
supporting Hamas and challenging Israel on the international arena138. Another very vocal
criticism of the Turkish foreign policy comes Srdja Trifković who claims that Turkey's
strategy in the Balkans envisages creation of a "Green Corridor", which shall be "a contiguous
chain of Muslim-dominated polities from Istanbul in the southeast to northwestern Bosnia, a
mere 120 miles from Austria"139.
The statement of Trifković illustrates to what extreme degree can the shifts in Turkish
foreign policy be perceived abroad. However, current Turkish foreign policy, according to
Grigoriadis tends to get blown out of proportions, because Turkey is not close to rebuilding
CEU eTD Collection
the Ottoman Empire, Turkey is not successful because it's trying to rebuild the Ottoman
Empire but because of its economy, it is a discursive battle in both Kemalist and conservative
circles140. A similar view is shared by Erdem Kaya, who believes that Neo-Ottomanism was
initiated by some like-minded analysts, who viewed Turkey turning to the south and east as an
alternative to the West, but Turkey is trying to enrich its foreign relations and to expand their
135
Ioannis Grigoriadis, interview in Ankara, 3rd of May, 2012.
Ziya Öniş, interview in Istanbul, 2nd of May 2012.
137
Yunus Yılmaz, Turkey's challenge to the realist world order, [in] Turkish Policy Quarterly, Volume 10,
Number 2, p. 88.
138
Ariel Cohen, op.cit., p. 30.
139
Srdja Trifković, op.cit.
140
Ioannis Grigoriadis, interview in Ankara, 3rd of May, 2012.
136
41
scope but these relations are not an alternative to its ties with the West141. Because of many
questioning Turkey's commitment to West, Turkish government frequently reiterates its
unequivocal support for European integration and its contribution to NATO's security. This
commitment finds an expression in the faithful ally role conception, however, this role is not
as prominent and frequently articulated in the foreign policy discourse of the AKP elites as
the one of regional ally or global sub-system collaborator. Hence, some analysts tend to view
the shifts in Turkish national role conceptions with a degree of suspicion and they resort to the
Neo-Ottomanist label, as a convenient and easy to grasp way of describing Turkish foreign
policy of the last decade.
4.1. From Davutoglu’s Strategic Depth to Neo-Ottomanism
The shifts in Turkish foreign policy initiated in 2002 by the AKP have not only
willingly produced a number of new national role conceptions, but also, contrary to the
wishes of Turkish policymakers, a new foreign policy discourse - Neo-Ottomanism, which
evokes some imperial notions, referring to Turkey's Ottoman grandeur. I have been trying to
demonstrate how national role conceptions theory of Holsti accounts for the changes Turkish
foreign policy underwent and I found it a useful tool to explain the motivations of
CEU eTD Collection
policymakers, which are the drivers of those changes. These policymakers project images of
their country, both for domestic as well as for international audience, they have clear role
conceptions of their state in mind and those cognitive conceptions resonate with a desire to
elevate Turkey's role in the region and in the world. However, they can be variously
interpreted not only in different countries, but also in different societal and political circles in
Turkey. By some the fact that Turkey desires to become a regional power is perceived as
141
Erdem Kaya, interview in Istanbul, 2nd of May 2012.
42
having an imperial ambition, whereas for others it is a merely an attempt to play a more
constructive role in the region without dominating it.
Holsti's theory identifies the role conceptions associated with such a posture on the
international arena, however, as I have found, it does not provide for an explanation of
different perceptions and understandings of those role conceptions. In the Turkish case, there
is a visible discrepancy between the officially articulated positions of Turkish policymakers
and the perception of an "axis shift" in Turkish foreign policy, which is especially strong
among its critics. My fieldwork confirmed that there are significant differences in perceptions
of Turkish foreign policy and the role conceptions which it implies. Those differences also
apply to term Neo-Ottomanism, which can be articulated in a way, which implies Turkey
leaving the West, whereas although the Ottoman Empire was "the sick man of Europe, it
nevertheless, was European, a fact which can create some paradoxes on the discursive level.
Other paradoxes could be associated with the large number or role conceptions
projected by Turkish foreign policy. At first glance the role conceptions of a bridge and a
regional leader, may not very likely seem incompatible, but nevertheless Turkish
policymakers project a high number of role conceptions to demonstrate that their foreign
policy has a broad spectrum and a multitude of fields where it desires to be engaged.
CEU eTD Collection
Moreover, according to Holsti, policymakers project a number of roles and visions for their
state142 and it is hardly surprising that an emerging regional power desires to assume more
prominence by pursuing a more active, multi-faceted foreign policy. Still, this desire which is
demonstrated in the high number of national role conceptions articulated by foreign policy
elites, is confronted with a discourse, which does not depict the ideas of policymakers in the
way they would do it.
142
K. J. Holsti, op.cit., p. 277.
43
5. Conclusion
The discursive formulation of Neo-Ottomanism has become very increasingly popular
in the last few years to define the recent national role conceptions in Turkey and shifts in its
foreign policy. Many writers and researches have thus developed an interest in it which
resulted in a plethora of articles, books and other publications. However, when one scrutinizes
a bit further this discourse, it becomes obvious that rather than being a national role
conceptualization cognitively designed by the Turkish elites or policymakers, it is rather a
perception. In this research, I thus attempted to scrutinize the gap between the officially
articulated role conceptions and their perceptions, by first looking at what the Turkish policymakers try to achieve and design and then exploring how these new conceptualizations are
interpreted and discursively formulated by scholars, analysts and journalist.
By applying Holsti’s theory of national role conceptions I identified the role
conceptions, which Turkish foreign policy elites have been articulating and projecting for
their nation. Most of those role conceptions have marked their appearance in the discourse
only in the past 10 years and as such they are a significant novelty in Turkish foreign policy. I
looked and then I investigated how the national role conceptions and their evolution have
been discursively turned into a rather dynamic Neo-Ottomanist debate, both domestically and
CEU eTD Collection
abroad. My fieldwork has given me evidence as to how vibrant on the one hand, and how
contested on the other hand the Neo-Ottomanist debate is and provided with an insight into its
latest developments. Finally, in my both theoretical and empirical work, I have come up with
the conclusions that, although unintended by the policymakers, there is a discrepancy between
their articulation of national role conceptions and perception of analysts, scholars and a wider
public.
Despite certain shortcomings of Holsti's theory, it is still a useful tool for analyzing
foreign policy, however certain improvements may be necessary to make it more accurate at
44
identifying national role conceptions. Since Holsti's theory was developed, a number of events
of great magnitude has changed the world and I believe his role conceptions need to be
reexamined and adjusted to contemporary reality. Role conceptions such as bastion of
revolution-liberator are mostly obsolete nowadays, yet states today due to a number of
different circumstances may display features of role conceptions, which have not yet been
identified or defined.
A secondary aspect of Holsti's theory, which needs to be further investigated is the
wide variety of interpretations of national role conceptions. In the case of Turkey the
difference between officially articulated role conceptions and their perceptions, especially
among their critics, is stark and calls for a further study. The shifts in national role
conceptions which I identified, have caused some to believe that Turkey is pursuing a neoimperial policy despite frequent refutations of policymakers. The exact reasons of such
perceptions need a further investigation, which should go beyond the simple Kemalist-NeoOttomanist dichotomy and include a more thorough study of both Turkish foreign policy and
CEU eTD Collection
Turkey's post-Ottoman history.
45
Appendix
Interview questions
1. What is Neo-Ottomanism?
a) Is it a merely a label or a foreign policy discourse?
2) What elements of Neo-Ottomanism are emphasized by:
a) its critics
b) by its proponents
3. Who constructed Neo-Ottomanism and Neo-Ottomanist discourse and for whom?
4. Until when can one trace the origins of the Neo-Ottoman discourse?
5. How does Neo-Ottomanism in general contribute to the literature of foreign-policy
discourses of geopolitical imaginations?
6. How is this discourse formed?
7. What are the differences in perceptions of Neo-Ottomanism among:
a) scholars b) politicians c) public 8. Why was Neo-Ottomanism created?
CEU eTD Collection
9. What does Neo-Ottomanism resonate with?
10. Can Neo-Ottomanism be compared to Russian "Near Abroad", neo-colonialism or
German Ostpolitik?
11. Isn't Neo-Ottomanism blown out of proportions by its proponents and demonized by its
opponents?
12. Isn't Neo-Ottomanism and its goals over-ambitious?
46
3. Bibliography
Adigbuo, Richard, Beyond IR Theories: The case for National Role Conceptions, [in]
Politikon, (April 2007), 34 (1).
Alexander, N. C., and Willey, M. G., Situated activity and identity formation, [in] Rosenberg,
M., and Turner, R. (eds.), Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives, Basic Books, New
York, 1981.
Aral, Berdal, Dispensing with Tradition? Turkish Politics and International Society during
the Özal Decade, 1983-93, [in] Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 37, No. 1 (Jan., 2001).
Aras, Bülent, Davutoğlu Era in Turkish Foreign Policy, SETA Policy Brief, Brief No: 32,
May 2009.
Aras, Bülent and Görener, Aylin, "National role conceptions and foreign policy orientation;
the ideational bases of the Justice and Development Party's foreign policy activism in the
Middle East" [in] Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies, Volume 12, Number 1, March
2010.
Ataman, Muhittin, Leadership Change: Özal leadership and restructuring in Turkish foreign
policy, [in] Alternatives: Turkish Journal of International Affairs, Volume 1, Number 1,
Spring 2002.
CEU eTD Collection
Borovalı, Ali Fuat, Post-modernity, Multiculturalism and ex-imperial hinterland: Habsburg
and Ottoman legacies revisited, [in] Perceptions, December 1997-February 1998 Volume II Number 4.
Atatürkcülük, III, Intellectual system of Atatürkism, Istanbul 1984.
Aydın, Mustafa, Twenty Years Before, Twenty Years After: Turkish Foreign Policy at the
Threshold of the 21st Century, [in] Turkey's Foreign Policy in the 21st Century: A Changing
Role in World Politics, ed. Tareq Ismael and Mustafa Aydın, Aldershot: Ashgate, 2003.
47
Barchard, David, Turkey and the West, [in] Chatham House Papers, Routledge & Kegan
Paul, London, Boston and Henley, 1985.
Bećirević, Edina, The Theory and Practice of Ahmet Davutoglu, [in] Democracy and Security
in Southeastern Europe (1/2010).
Cem, Ismail, Preface, [in] Turkey & the World 2010-2020, Emergence of a Global Actor,
Istanbul, DIVAK, 1998.
Chafetz, Glenn, Abramson, Hillel and Grillot, Suzette, Role Theory and Foreign Policy:
Belarussian and Ukrainian Compliance with the Nuclear Nonproliferation Regime, [in]
Political Psychology , Vol. 17, No. 4 (Dec., 1996).
Cohen, Ariel, Washington concerned as Turkey leaving the West, [in] Turkish Policy
Quarterly, Volume 9, Number 3.
Çandar, Cengiz and Fuller, Graham E., Grand Geopolitics for a New Turkey, [in]
Mediterranean Quarterly: Winter 2001.
Çınar, Yusuf, interview in Konya, 4th of May 2012.
Çolak, Yılmaz, Ottomanism vs. Kemalism: Collective Memory and Cultural Pluralism in
1990s Turkey, [in] Middle Eastern Studies, Vol. 42, No. 4, 587-602, July 2006.
Danforth, Nicholas, Ideology and Pragmatism in Turkish Foreign Policy: From Atatürk to the
CEU eTD Collection
AKP, [in] Turkish Policy Quarterly, Volume 7, Number 3, 2008.
Davutoğlu, Ahmet, Principles of Turkish Foreign Policy and Regional Political Structuring,
[in] Turkey Policy Brief Series, 2012 Third Edition,
http://www.mfa.gov.tr/site_media/html/bakanmakale_tepev.pdf, last accessed at 8:59, on the
20th of May 2012.
Davutoğlu, Ahmet, speech at the Annual Ambassadors’ Conference of Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, 2011.
48
Davutoğlu, Ahmet, Turkey Foreign Policy Vision: an Assessment of 2007, [in] Insight Turkey,
Vol. 10, No. 1.
Davutoğlu, Ahmet, Turkey's Zero-Problems Foreign Policy, Foreign Policy,
http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2010/05/20/turkeys_zero_problems_foreign_policy?pa
ge=0,1&hidecomments=yes, last accessed at 00:40, on the 21st of May 2012.
Erdoğan, Recep Tayyip, Conservative Democracy and the Globalization of Freedom, speech
at the American Enterprise Institute, 29 January 2004.
Erdoğan, Recep Tayyip, Newsweek, 12 May 2008.
Erdoğan, Recep Tayyip, Turkish Daily News, 29 July 2004.
Erdoğan, Recep Tayyip, Turkish Daily News, 5 February 2005.
Erdoğan, Recep Tayyip, Turkish Daily News, 2 May 2005.
Erdoğan, Recep Tayyip, Turkish Daily News, 17 May 2005.
Erdoğan, Recep Tayyip, Turkish Daily News, 9 July 2005.
Erdoğan, Recep Tayyip, Turkish Daily News, 4 January, 2009.
Eren-Webb, Ebru, To which Eurasia does Turkey belong? A comparative analysis of Turkish
Eurasianist geopolitical discourses, [in] Boğaziçi Joural, Vol. 25, no. 2 (2011), pp. 59-82.
Fisher Onar, Nora, Neo Ottomanism, Historical Legacies and Turkish Foreign Policy, EDAM
CEU eTD Collection
Discussion Paper Series - 2009/03.
Fuller, Graham, Turkey faces East: New orientations toward the Middle East and the Old
Soviet Union, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, CA, 1992.
Gardels, Nathan interview with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, “A Union of Civiliations,” New
Perspectives Quarterly, Vol. 24. Iss. 3, 2007, 27.
Grigoriadis loannis, N., The Davutoğlu Doctrine and Turkish Foreign Policy, Bilkent
University / ELIAMEP Middle Eastern Studies Programme April 2010.
Grigoriadis loannis, interview in Ankara, 3rd of May 2012.
49
Gül, Abdullah, speech given in Bosporus University in Istanbul 2004.
Holsti, K. J., National Role Conceptions in the Study of Foreign Policy, [in] International
Studies Quarterly, Volume 14, Number 3, September 1970.
Holsti, K. J., Why Nations Realign, Allen and Unwin, London, 1982.
Hymans, Jacques E. C., The Psychology of Nuclear Proliferation, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge 2006.
Karpat, Kemal H., Studies on Turkish Politics and Society. Selected articles and essays, Brill
Academic Pub, Leiden, 2004.
Kaya, Erdem, interview, 2nd of May 2012.
Kirişci, Kemal, The transformation of Turkish foreign policy: The rise of the trading state,
[in] New Perspectives on Turkey, no. 40 (2009).
Kupchan, Charles, The Vulnerability of Empire, Cornelll University Press, Ithaca, NY, 1994.
Laçiner, Sedat, Turgut Özal Period in Turkish Foreign Policy: Özalism, [in] USAK Yearbook
of International Politics and Law, Vol. 2, 2009.
McNamara, Sally, Cohen, Ariel, Countering Turkey's Strategic Drift, [in] Backgrounder, No.
2442, The Heritage Foundation, July 26, 2010.
Meral, Ziya, Paris Jonathan, Decoding Turkish Foreign Policy Hyperactivity, [in] Washington
CEU eTD Collection
Quarterly, October 2010.
Morgenthau, Hans J., Politics Among Nations, (4th edition), Alfred A. Knopf, New York
1967.
Murinson, Alexander, The Strategic Depth Doctrine of Turkish Foreign Policy, [in] Middle
Eastern Studies, Vol. 42, No. 6, November 2006.
New FM Davutoğlu to build order-instituting role for Turkey,
http://www.todayszaman.com/newsDetail_getNewsById.action?load=detay&link=174284,
last accessed at 1:10, on the 20th of May 2012.
50
Оğuzlu, Tarik, Middle Easternization of Turkey's Foreign Policy: Does Turkey Dissociate
from the West?, [in] Turkish Studies, Vol. 9, No.1, 3-20, March 2008.
Oktav, Özden Zeynep, (ed.), Turkey in the 21st Century: Quest for a New Foreign Policy,
Asghate, Surrey 2011.
Öniş, Ziya, Multiple Faces of the “New” Turkish Foreign Policy: Underlying Dynamics and
a Critique, [in] Insight Turkey, Vol. 13 / No. 1 / 2011.
Öniş, Ziya, interview, 2nd of May 2012.
Paul, Amanda, Seyrek Demir Murat, Turkish foreign policy and the Arab Spring, EPC
Commentary, 15.07.2011.
Renda, Kadri Kaan, Politicians as Story-Tellers: Narrative Reconstruction of Turkish Foreign
Policy, http://www.psa.ac.uk/journals/pdf/5/2012/809_431.pdf, last accessed at 15:07, on the
15th of May 2012.
Rüma, İnan, Turkish Foreign Policy towards th Balkans: New Activism, Neo-Ottomanism
or/so what?, [in] Turkish Policy Quarterly, Volume 9 Number 4.
Sarbin, T. R. and V. L. Allen (1968) "Role theory" in G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.) The
Handbook of Social Psychology, Vol. 1. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Shih, Chih-yu, National Role Conception as Foreign Policy Motivation: The Psychocultural
CEU eTD Collection
Bases of Chinese Diplomacy, [in] Political Psychology , Vol. 9, No. 4 (Dec., 1988).
Sözen, Ahmet, Paradigm Shift in Turkish Foreign Policy: Transition and Challenges, [in]
Turkish Studies, Vol. 11, No. 1, 103-123, March 2010.
Taheri, Amir, “Turkey’s Bid to Raise Its Islamic Profile and Court Europe May Backfire,”
ArabView,
http://archive.arabnews.com/?page=7&section=0&article=52442&d=6&m=10&y=2004, last
accessed at 15:32, on the 14th of May 2012.
51
Taşpınar, Ömer, Neo-Ottomanism and Kemalist foreign policy, [in] Today's Zaman, 22
September 2008 http://www.todayszaman.com/columnists-153882-neo-ottomanism-andkemalist-foreign-policy.html.
Taşpinar, Ömer, The Three Strategic Visions of Turkey, US - Europe Analysis Series Number
50, The Brookings Institution, March 8 2011.
Taşpinar, Ömer, Turkey’s Middle East Policies Between Neo-Ottomanism and Kemalism, [in]
Carnegie Papers, Number 10, September 2008.
TBMM Tutanak Dergisi Vol.70, Session 39, 2004.
TBMM Tutanak Dergisi Vol. 105, Session.38, 2005.
TBMM Tutanak Dergisi Vol. 87, Session.37, 2011.
The strategic depth that Turkey needs, an interview with Ahmet Davutoğlu, Turkish Daily
News, 15 September 2001.
Trifković, Srdja, Turkey as a regional power: Neo-Ottomanism in Action,
http://www.balkanstudies.org/articles/neo-ottomanism-action-turkey-regional-power.
Turkey Seeks to Be International Mediation Center,
http://www.turkishnews.com/en/content/2012/03/04/turkey-seeks-to-be-internationalmediation-center, last accessed at 1:00, on the 20th of May 2012.
CEU eTD Collection
Walker, S. G., (1978) "National role conceptions and systematic outcomes." Prepared for the
annual meeting of the International Studies Association, Washington, D. C. February 22-25.
Wish, Naomi Bailin, Foreign Policy Makers and Their National Role Conceptions, [in]
International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 24 No 4, December 1980.
Yanık, Lerna K., Constructing Turkish "exceptionalism": Discourses of liminality and
hybridity in the post-Cold War Turkish foreign policy, [in] Political Geography 30 (2011).
Yinanç, Barçın, Re-allying with old allies, [in] Hürriyet Daily News, May 5th, 2012.
52
Yılmaz, Yunus, Turkey's challenge to the realist world order, [in] Turkish Policy Quarterly,
CEU eTD Collection
Volume 10, Number 2.
53